Introduction: At
first glance, the stories recorded in our lesson material donít seem to relate
to one another.† A common thread does
bind the two accounts.† The appearance of
the heavenly messengers reveals two lessons. First, God is gracious and
faithful to his people. Despite the frailty of Abrahamís faith and many
missteps along the way, God kept his word.†
For the first time in the Abraham story, Godís promise became
time-specific.† Within a year, Sarah
would bear the long-expected son. Second, God intended to judge Sodom and Gomorrah.
For Abrahamís sake, God chose to spare Lotís
family, but time had run out for the wicked cities of the plain.† †

Lesson Outline:

I.The Appearance of the Three Men (18:1-15)

A.The
arrival of the men (vv. 1-8): Abraham sojourned near an Amorite man named Mamre
(See Genesis 14:13), and, while living in this region, three men appeared to
the patriarch.† The text indicates that
one of the men was the Lord (a theophany- God appearing in the form of a
man).† Some have attempted a Trinitarian
interpretation, based on this passage, but the text, it seems to me, wonít bear
that weight. †Abraham greeted the
respected visitors in typical Middle Eastern fashion: he bowed before them,
washed their feet (most likely required a servant to complete this task), and
prepared a hearty meal for his guests.

B.The
prediction of the birth of Isaac (vv. 9-15): As preparations of the meal
continued, the Lord predicted that he would return in a year to mark the birth
of a son to Abraham.† Sarah, listening
from her tent, laughed at the notion that a menopausal woman would conceive a
child. The Lord challenged Sarahís cynicism and restated the promise that she
would bear a son, in a year.† Sarah,
embarrassed and afraid, denied that she had laughed at the message of the Lord.
Note, however, that her unbelief did not negate the Lordís promise and mercy.

II.Godís Dealings with Sodom
and Gomorrah
(18:16-19-38)

A.Godís
revelation to Abraham (18:16-21): Abraham accompanied the messengers as they
departed from Mamre, and, as the travelers neared the cities of the plain, the
Lord revealed his plans to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. The wickedness
of these cities had not escaped the Lordís notice, and he determined to judge
their grave sin (See attachment for a brief discussion of the nature of Sodomís sin).

B.Abrahamís
intercession (18:22-33): Abrahamís intercession may appear like he haggled with
the Lord, seeking to strike some kind of deal to avert the destruction of the
cities.† However, we should note the
patriarchís careful humility and submission to the Lordís sovereign, righteous
prerogative (See especially 18:25). Instead of haggling, it appears that
Abraham had a genuine concern for the people of Sodom, and his compassion compelled him to
plead for them.

C.The
Rescue of Lot (19:1-22): Abrahamís nephew had chosen the fertile plain when he
separated from his uncle, in Genesis Thirteen.†
At first, Lotís family lived in tents pitched near Sodom, but, by the time we find him in
Genesis Nineteen, his family had taken up permanent residence in the city.
Clearly, the populous of Sodom knew Lot well.† Two of
the messengers entered Sodom, and Lot greeted them with warm hospitality. In time, the men
came to Lotís home and demanded that the messengers come out of the house so
that the men of Sodom
might ďknowĒ them.† Lot,
alarmed by the press of the crowd, offered his virgin daughters to the
lecherous masses.† Undeterred, the men
violently assailed Lotís house and were struck
blind (the Hebrew word denotes a stunned, senseless state) by the angels.† The messengers warned Lot of the impending
destruction of Sodom;
yet, the reluctant man lingered in the city, perhaps because of his station and
wealth.† Eventually, the angels seized Lot and escorted the hesitant family out of warmís
way.† Still, Lot
negotiated with the messengers.† He
pleaded that his family might find refuge in Zoar
rather than take refuge in the hills.

D.The
destruction of the cities of the plain (19:23-29): After Lot had left Sodom, God rained down
fire and brimstone on the plain.† Some
have attempted a naturalistic explanation for this destruction, but the text
makes clear this was divine judgment on the cities. Lotís
wife looked back on the destruction, despite the warnings of the angels, and
the destructive elements consumed her.†

E.Lot and his daughters. (19:30-38): Oddly, Zoar, the city
Lot chose, rejected him, and the forlorn remnants of Lotís
family hid in the hills.† The two
daughters conspired to seduce their father.†
They got Lot drunk and had relations
with him.† Each daughter bore a son: Moab and Ammon.

The sin of Sodom: The text
does not explicitly state the sin that brought Godís judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah;
in fact, the Bible does not imply that a particular sin brought this
destruction.† It seems reasonable that
these people sinned in many ways.†

Isaiah 3:8-9 says that their speech and deeds are against the
Lord. This may refer to blasphemy and acts of deliberate defiance of God.† Jeremiah 23:14 indicates that the cities of
the plain were guilty of adultery, lying, and injustice.† In addition, the prophet Ezekiel (16:49)
outlined a number of Sodomís
transgressions: pride, gluttony, luxurious living, and oppression of the
poor.† These lists do not overlap in
their accusations; therefore, we must conclude that city was guilty of a broad
range of sins.

Traditionally, many Jewish and Christian commentators have
concluded that homosexuality was at the heart of Sodomís wickedness.† Genesis Nineteen gives some indication of
sexual sin in Sodom.† The word ďknowĒ, in verse five, probably has
some sexual overtone.† Some commentators
object to this view on the grounds that the Old Testament often employs this
word without any sexual connotation; however, the Book of Genesis uses this
term several times where the author clearly indicated physical intimacy.† Furthermore, the fact that Lot
offered his virgin daughters to the men seems to indicate some sexual intent in
their advances. In the New Testament Book of Jude (v. 7) we find a dual
reference to ďsexual immorality and unnatural desires.Ē† This seems like an unmistakable indication
that homosexuality characterized the cities of the plain.†

In 1981 John Boswell wrote, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, an American Book
Award winner.† Boswell was a life-long
Roman Catholic, but he vigorously disagreed with the teaching of the Church on
the issue of homosexuality.† He concluded
that Sodom
demonstrated a remarkably inhospitable environment to the visiting
messengers.† This, he concluded, was the
sin of Sodom. Furthermore, Boswell wrote, ďThe New Testament takes no
demonstrable position on homosexuality.Ē†
I respect Boswellís scholarship, but I do not understand his position on
the teachings of the Bible.† Other
scholars have argued that modern Christians make too much of this sin.† They observe that only a handful of texts
deal with the topic; therefore, contemporary Christians exaggerate the
importance of this moral issue.† This
criticism may have some validity.† It is
true that the Bible devotes more material to other transgressions, and
Christian ethicists need to retain some proportionality.† However, I have some concern about this kind
of reasoning.† How often does the Bible
need to mention an issue before it becomes normative for Christian living?†† Whatís the magic numberófive, ten,
twelve?† There is sufficient revelation
for us to conclude that this lifestyle, like many others, does not please the
Lord.

For a helpful, thoughtful treatment of the homosexual issue,
I suggest John Stottís, Decisive Issues
Facing Christians Today.